Dne 19.11.2015 v 21:21 Sergey Kondakov napsal(a):
On 19.11.2015 00:45, Tomáš Čech wrote:
I'm sorry you find my e-mail as systematic attack, it was reminder to moderator.
I haven't wrote about a "systematic attack", I wrote about "systematic approach" of ignoring and/or shutting down opposing opinions or even non-common goals of other openSUSE users.
All I meant was - if your frustration is result of some long time fight against 'self-important single-minded group ...' you could write earlier in less offensive and more factual way. IMHO you could target wider audience that way.
It's not that it's a "long time fight against" anybody, it's just not what should be expected from FOSS Community participants even if they are on corporate payroll. It seems there is a despicable censorship feature on this list. And openSUSE officials developed careless attitude to un-official repoes as if they are only representatives of The Community. That way, hacky "solutions" to un-clear problems of company repoes are immediately accepted but any problems of non-company repos, including ones stemming from those hacky "solutions", can be freely spat upon, ignored for months, years or forever. Like this - http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2015-11/msg00381.html - I actually wanted to write about this thing too for a while now, even before trying "The Tumbleweed Product".
And the reason for this is clear even if labelled as "conspiracy theory". Then packages go into official repoes, they end up in SLE, and that adds features without expenditure which brings easy money. But in un-official repoes people are developing features for themselves, it's not profitable to help them but "incentivizing" them to go official may be so. And incentive may come from making that easy... or from making other things hard.
But it's true that "less offensive and more factual way" is always warranted. Or at least "less overtly offensive". Talking mad disrespectful shit in seemingly polite way and appear civil, like that "unfortunately this person isn't willing to progress" part. That's an art.
BTW I know that feeling.
I appreciate the sympathy.
Hi I guess that you failed to understand that Tomáš Čech agrees with you on technical level, yet he disagrees with ad hominem's and accusations you are making. Furthermore to speak openly, fact that you looked up post by Tomas, on unrelated topic and mention it several time as some sort of example of behavior which offends you makes you look like a very vindictive person, eager to personally attack someone who dares to disagree with you. Furthermore, would it kill you to break lines at 78 or 80 characters as most people in this ml do? Martin Pluskal Proud member of self-important single-minded group